Masking in Audiometry III: Reflections upon the present position
- 1 January 1962
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Acta Oto-Laryngologica
- Vol. 54 (1) , 521-531
- https://doi.org/10.3109/00016486209126970
Abstract
The rules governing the use of masking in air and bone conduction audio-metry are discussed and the situations leading to cross-hearing are presented. The advantages and disadvantages of the bone conduction masking procedure (Rainville) are considered. The authors at present prefer a frontal placement of the bone conduction receiver, the masking noise being led to the ear by an ear canal insert. The latter increases the interaural attenuation by 15 to 20 db and thus facilitates bone conduction audiometry.Keywords
This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit:
- The Sensorineural Acuity Level (SAL) Technique: An Experiment with Some ObservationsJAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery, 1961
- Problems in the Measurement of Bone ConductionJournal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 1961
- The m‐r test of bone‐conduction hearingThe Laryngoscope, 1960
- A New Method for the Clinical Determination of Sensorineural Acuity Level (SAL)JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery, 1960
- Modern Masking Techniques and their Application to the Diagnosis of Functional DeafnessThe Journal of Laryngology & Otology, 1959
- Masking in Clinical AudiometryActa Oto-Laryngologica, 1959
- Masking in Audiometry: Further StudiesActa Oto-Laryngologica, 1958
- Middle Ear Conduction Deafness and Bone ConductionActa Oto-Laryngologica, 1955
- Masking in Audiometry: With special reference to the non-thermal type of noiseActa Oto-Laryngologica, 1954
- Clinical reliability of bone conduction audiometryThe Laryngoscope, 1949